V court delhi

List • 2November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-02) • 7November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-07) • 8November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-08) • 9November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-09) • 14November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-14) • 15November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-15) • 16November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-16) • 21November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-21) • 22November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-22) • 23November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-23) • 28November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-28) • 29November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-29) • 30November 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-11-30) • 5December 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-12-05) • 6December 2017 ;5 years ago ( 2017-12-06) Decided 4July 2018 ;4 years ago ( 2018-07-04) Citation(s) (2018) 8 SCC 501 C. A. No. 2357 of 2017 D. No. 29357-2016 Case history Prior action(s) Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi v. Union of India Court membership Judges sitting CJI; J; Case opinions Decision by Concurrence Laws applied This case overturned a previous ruling Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi versus Union of India by Government of NCT of Delhi versus Union of India & Another [ C. A. No. 2357 of 2017] is a 2016 verdict of the 2017. The supreme court pronounced its judgment on 4 July 2018; it said the lieutenant governor of Delhi had no independent decision-making powers and was bound to follow the "aid and advice" of the Delhi chief-minister-headed council of ministers of the Background [ ] The After India's indepen...

Delhi Govt vs LG in Supreme Court Live Updates: Govt removes Services secretary Ashish More The Delhi government has removed services secretary Ashish More, hours after the Supreme Court verdict giving it control over transfer-posting of officers. Earlier, CM Arvind Kejriwal thanked the top court after a five-judge bench announced a unanimous verdict on the legal wrangle between the Centre and Delhi government over control of services in the national capital. The Constitution bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha said that Delhi government has control over services whereas Centre has power over land, law and order. The bench also said that real power should stay with the elected government. Stay with TOI all updates: Read Less There is news circulating in certain sections of the media that the LG did not agree to/approve the proposals for transfer/posting of officials, made by the Chief Minister. It is clarified that no such request for transfer/posting of any official was ever received from the Chief Minister or from his ministers. Any assertion made in this regard is totally false and fabricated. As a matter of fact, LG responded proactively to the AAP Government's various demands for appointments, made in the public domain, including that of the Principal Secretary in PWD: Delhi Lt Governor House officials. (ANI) Mayor Shelly Oberoi on Thursday hailed the Supreme Court's verdict on the Centre-Delhi servic...

The original poster of the film “Nayak”. Image from Following on from Niyati’s earlier Implications and Takeaways from Delhi High Court’s Order in RDB and Co HUF v. Harper Collins Publishers Rahul Bajaj In a significant judgment delivered on 23 rd May, 2023 [ th May, 2018. The plaintiff’s argument was that the novelization of the screenplay by the defendant infringed its copyright, u/s 51. The defendant argued that copyright in the film vested in Mr. Ray, and after him in his son Sandip Ray, who assigned it to the Society for the Preservation of Satyajit Ray Archives[SPSRA], from whom the defendant had secured a license to novelize the screenplay. Holding of the Court A breakdown of the analysis in the judgment indicates that the Court proceeded in the following steps: • First, the definition of a literary work [S. 2(o)] in the Copyright Act, 1957 [the Act] is not exhaustive. Courts have construed literary works expansively. A screenplay is a literary work, both because it is consistent with the inclusion of ‘tables’ and compilations’ in the definition of a ‘literary work’ and because it is not a dramatic work. Therefore, a screenplay is covered by S. 13(1)(a) which vests the copyright in original literary works. • Second, as per S. 13(4) of the Act, the copyright in a cinematograph film or a sound recording shall not affect the separate copyright in any work in respect of which or a substantial part of which is embodied in the film or sound recording. This, therefore, mea...

New Delhi: Control of the Delhi Anti-Corruption Bureau? Check. Revising agricultural land rates? Check. Power to set up commissions of inquiry? Check. Control of civil services in the national capital? The jury is still out. It’s closing on two years, but the Supreme Court is yet to settle a contentious matter with respect to the distribution of powers between the Delhi government and the central government as regards the administration of the national capital. This is the question of who has control over ‘services’ in Delhi, a union territory (UT). The matter of distribution of powers in Delhi has been at the centre of a raging debate for years — since it is the national capital, the central government has retained rights over certain matters, such as public order. Many other jurisdictional matters, like those mentioned above, have been taken up by the judiciary, and settled one way or the other. For example, the Supreme Court ruled in February 2019 that the power to appoint a special public prosecutor will lie with the Delhi government, while also stating that the central government holds exclusive authority over the ACB. The issue of services, however, divided the bench that delivered this order and the matter was referred to a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court. Since then, the case has seen just three one-line orders, all deferring the matter to different dates. Also Read: Article 239AA At the core of the tussle between the Union and Delhi governments is...